Apple chief Tim Cook: 'I'm proud to be gay'

[CountDeMoney]

I'm assuming here the boss isn't motivated by sentimental concerns, but cold, hard shareholder values.

Seedy: cornered.

Eat me.

[Valmy]

The boss has a wife and kids, too.

Heart-warming compassion by shareholder value.

[Syt]

http://rt.com/politics/201167-milonov-cook-gay-ban/

St Pete anti-gay crusader urges entry ban on Apple's Cook

A Russian lawmaker known for his relentless struggle against gay propaganda has suggested slapping an entry ban on Tim Cook over fears that the businessman would "make homosexuality fashionable" and "impose changes in human relations."

"Tim Cook's coming out was a political statement. It was not a marketing ploy of his company. Cook has stopped being a businessman and became a politician. This man is trying to force people into changing human relations," Vitaly Milonov said in an interview with mass circulation daily Izvestia.

The lawmaker added that he suspected Tim Cook will decide to visit Russia one day, not just to tell people about new gadgets but also to promote a new type of family, which, according to Milonov, was extremely undesirable.

"What do we gain by letting him visit Russia? He should first give us guarantees that our fingerprints will not end up on American servers."

At the same time, the Russian politician admitted that he himself was using the iPhone 6 and had no plans to stop doing so. "The phone should not be blamed. It was created by Steve Jobs, who was a normal guy. After Jobs's death another manager took over. They come and go, maybe he will get AIDS tomorrow," Milonov stated.

Milonov is well-known in Russia and abroad as the author of the St. Petersburg regional law that bans the promotion of homosexuality to minors. After the bill was introduced in Russia's second-largest city (and a number of other regions), the federal parliament voted for a similar nationwide ban, causing a wave of protests in Russia and abroad. His other initiatives included the bill outlawing child beauty pageants, forced resettlement of homeless people in rural areas, a campaign against fake accounts in social networks and many others.

[CountDeMoney]

What's in that decision for the boss? Why should the boss care whether you - or Dave, his wife, and little Timmy - are out on the street?

I'm assuming here the boss isn't motivated by sentimental concerns, but cold, hard shareholder values.

If it comes down to eliminating one position between two individuals--single and childless Employee A and Employee B with the wife and kids--with all things being equal in experience, performance and salary, you and I both know which one gets the axe.  So don't play stupid.

Now, when it comes to a larger-scale reductions in force and mass layoffs, in order to prevent any appearance of age discrimination the cuts are staggered by age:  oldest employee, youngest employee, 2nd oldest employee, 2nd youngest employee, 3rd oldest, 3rd youngest, and so on--leaving empty nesters heading for retirement and younger singles just starting out as the biggest chunk of the casualties, and the survivors wind up being those that have families.  If you're shaving off the top oldest and the top youngest, it's the median that's still going to have the majority of established families.

[Valmy]

If it comes down to eliminating one position between two individuals--single and childless Employee A and Employee B with the wife and kids--with all things being equal in experience, performance and salary, you and I both know which one gets the axe.  So don't play stupid.

Actually I did not know this.  Granted you have a lot more experience in this sort of thing.  When I have gotten laid off it was because the entire department got axed and the service we provided outsourced to the third world shithole of Oklahoma.  So...yeah.  But really how often are you going to have two people with identical experience, performance evaluations and salary?  Even enough to make a statistical difference?

Now, when it comes to a larger-scale reductions in force and mass layoffs, in order to prevent any appearance of age discrimination the cuts are staggered by age:  oldest employee, youngest employee, 2nd oldest employee, 2nd youngest employee, 3rd oldest, 3rd youngest, and so on--leaving empty nesters heading for retirement and younger singles just starting out as the biggest chunk of the casualties, and the survivors wind up being those that have families.  If you're shaving off the top oldest and the top youngest, it's the median that's still going to have the majority of established families.

So it is just a coincidence they have families.

[CountDeMoney]

So it is just a coincidence they have families.

It certainly doesn't invalidate the fact that getting married and having children helps one's career.

[Valmy]

So it is just a coincidence they have families.

It certainly doesn't invalidate the fact that getting married and having children helps one's career.

I don't see how it validates it, just that when layoffs start you want to be a certain age.

[Berkut]

The world is out to get Seedy.

[CountDeMoney]

The world hates that I traffic in the truth.

[Berkut]

Can change his mind and won't change the subject.


I am shocked, SHOCKED to find another thread where whatever the subject might be, it has turned into another foaming mouth rant about the injustice of capitalism.

[garbon]

I am shocked, SHOCKED to find another thread where whatever the subject might be, it has turned into another foaming mouth rant about the injustice of capitalism.

I mean he is a troll in that way.

[MadImmortalMan]

Everyone is equally disposable.


But.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-more-educated-higher-income-than-heterosexual-couples

http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.

They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.

Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.

http://www.experian.com/blogs/marketing-forward/2012/07/20/sim-a-look-at-household-income-and-discretionary-spend-of-lesbian-gay-and-heterosexual-americans/

I would not go so far as to assert that gays make more money because they are gay. The correlation is likely tangential, indirect. One of the biggest factors in the household income category would definitely be the presence or lack of children. I'd guess lots of second earners are part time due to kids. Also, nobody is going to call discrimination if a straight white dude gets fired. If that means anything. So it's not like all of the ways that being gay affect a person in the workplace are negative. It's more like the ways that being gay in society tend to be more negative and that can carry into the workplace. Or something like that.

[Martinus]

If gays and lesbians make more money than straights, then it is because of their innate ability to overcome obstacles and odds stacked against them.

If breeders make more money than gays, then it is because of the straight privilege.

Learn to read statistics, people. 

[Martinus]

Anyways, in all seriousness, YMMV. I am talking from the perspective of a Polish gay person, and we are where the US gays were in the 1990s. So it is still not a fait accompli.

[Admiral Yi]

Marty has learned how to laugh about gay issues.